Winkel V. Family Health Care Case Summary

Words: 1022
Pages: 5

Business Ethics: Winkel v. Family Health Care
Loren Vranich entered into a written employment contract with one Dennis Winkel under Family Healthcare, P.C. this contract entitled Winkel to an annual salary, insurance benefits and other employment benefits. Another doctor that practiced with Dr. Vranich, Dr. Quan, left the business and Vranich entered into an oral agreement with Winkel that was a modification to the written contract. In it, he was to receive a salary bump and a profit-sharing bonus. The following year, Winkel did not get the bonus but received the salary. He sued to recover the bonus. Under Montana law, only an executed oral agreement can alter a written contract. Dr. Vranich, however, argued that the contract was not written
…show more content…
Goettee
Mrs. Chaney died and left a house in Annapolis, Maryland. Goettee was the estate representative. The property was approximated to be 15,650 square feet. Faust and Drs. Steele made an offer for the estate of $300,000 and was accepted. A contract was signed by them for owning the estate. A survey that was done before deed signing showed that the estate was in fact 22,047 square feet, and the buyers were expected to pay more for the estate. The buyers then sued for specific performance when the estate refused to transfer the property to them.
In this case, the problem was that the estate was larger than was stated when the buyers entered into the contract. Upon the discovery on the survey, the estate wanted to rescind the contract on the grounds that a mistake was made. They, however, cannot rescind the contract because the mistake was unilateral on their part. The court, therefore, cannot grant rescission because the mistake was made by one party and was not as a result of bad faith or abuse on the part of the buyers. The only condition under which the court could grant rescission was if the mistake was bilateral or if there was evident malice played by the buyer. Looking at the estate could show that it was bigger. Therefore, the buyers could enforce the contract as they did, by specific